Debate with Greer Lawsuit thread regulars about the proper FAQ to be posted in the OP

I think these are some important questions, the others are either already answered or should be answered by an update to the op instead of the faq format.
TooManyKittens said:
Q: Why won't Null answer <whatever>?
Q: Why won't Null settle?
Q: Why isn't Google a party?
Q: Why is the judge disagreeing with himself?
Q: Why is there so much about emails/Hitler/stupidity in Russell's filings?
Q: Why does Russell get so many chances by the court?
Q: Shouldn't Russell know this stuff? Doesn't he have a paralegal degree?
Q: Will Null get money from Greer?
Click to expand...
 
  • Like
Reactions: CEO of Pickles
Lapsus of the bepsus said:
let me give this bombshell a shot

A: Russell objected to the district judge about the sanction imposed by the magistrate judge. The district judge granted his objection in part, citing the fact that Russell is a pro se plaintiff and this is the first sanction against him in this case, and set the sanction at $1000 without even reading Hardin's fee breakdown while acknowledging that $1000 is likely not enough to cover Null's expenses arising from this issue. This is also in contradiction to court rules and case law establishing that discovery sanctions, if merited, should be awarded automatically and in a reasonable amount based on the movant's breakdown of expenses. Null was also not given the opportunity to respond to Russell's partially affirmed objection in any way.
Click to expand...

Everyone keeps says this contradicts court rules and caselaw, and that’s simply not correct. Courts have broad discretion, and they have exercised that discretion to reduce sanctions to below reasonable attorneys’ fees. I’m not talking about a reasonableness of fees evaluation/ reduction, but rather either a reduction along equity/discretionary lines to basically a fine amount (but due to the other party) or because a litigant is IFP. Or whatever. It can happen and it does. Pretty sure I posted an example or two at some point. And the District Court ordered a set fee due to IFP and that it was a first sanction, explicitly acknowledging in footnote 54 of its Order, “[T]his award, although higher than Mr. Greer’s request of up to $500, is presumably far lower than the costs and fees incurred as a result of Mr. Greer’s Rule 26 violations.”

It was a baby-splitting effort to stop the madness and to derail the “those fees would effectively be case-ending,” bitching from Russell and (more) endless litigation. But the assessment of a set fee had basis.

If you want to be “factual,” then at least throw in an “arguably,” though it’s more factual to say “some have speculated or are of the opinion that.”

And as a ps, no, sanctions are not automatic.
 
  • Horrifying
  • Lunacy
Reactions: Vecr and Terrifik
Dizzyuntildeath said:
Did you guys bully the poor guy for getting excited and trying to be constructive
Click to expand...
At this point half the lawsuit thread is people coming in and debating the same questions. Getting them wrong will either get you bullied or jannied, and sometimes that's necessary.

Doing it in a separate thread is the right call and I hope we can get a useful FAQ to point people to.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rainbow Idiot, Vecr and Useful_Mistake
DHugo said:
I think these are some important questions, the others are either already answered or should be answered by an update to the op instead of the faq format.
Click to expand...
1. Because he doesn't want to/doesn't have to, and because it is generally a good advice to not talk about your lawsuit even if you are completely in the right.
2. Because Null doesn't want to, and the settlement deal would create more problems than it would solve. It also stands against his principles against censorship regarding cows (though it is not without limit).
3. Because, per words of Russell Greer, "the employees at Google would have complied" and because they "aren’t taunting Greer through email about his copyright"
4. He isn't.
5. Because Russ likes attention
Not going to address 6, because that would be speculation
7. Yes and Yes
8. If Greer complies with the Court order sanctioning him.
 
  • Winner
Reactions: Terrifik
Friend of Dorothy Parker said:
Courts have broad discretion
Click to expand...
weve all seen as much im sure. "courts have broad discretion" could be used as a blanket answer for just about every single question on the list that raises an issue of tard guarding or one of the judges making a retarded decision, so whats the fucking point of even having a q&a then. i dont think its wrong to construe the answers in nulls favor. a little bit of bropaganda strengthens morale among kiwis
 
Useful_Mistake said:
1. Because he doesn't want to/doesn't have to, and because it is generally a good advice to not talk about your lawsuit even if you are completely in the right.
2. Because Null doesn't want to, and the settlement deal would create more problems than it would solve. It also stands against his principles against censorship regarding cows (though it is not without limit).
3. Because, per words of Russell Greer, "the employees at Google would have complied" and because they "aren’t taunting Greer through email about his copyright"
4. He isn't.
5. Because Russ likes attention
Not going to address 6, because that would be speculation
7. Yes and Yes
8. If Greer complies with the Court order sanctioning him.
Click to expand...
Not going to lie, I would love to hear your speculation about 6 in a place that doesn't destroy thread cohesion and traffic. As you and your foil point out every slew of filings, this case is a radioactive mess and has taken so long and had so many weird U turns, fuck ups and misc. bullshit both from the top down and the bottom up that it has altered the landscape in which it lives.
 
If we are seriously making suggestions for FAQ/OP updates to the legal thread, I'd like to submit this for consideration (since the whole "Why did the judge blah blah" seems to be the thing that comes up the most):
~ ~ ~
Q: Why did the judge do xyz?

A: It's important to note that there's more than one judge here. It's a federal case in the United States District Court for the District of Utah. As such, there's a District Judge assigned: District Judge David Barlow (a Trump appointee). He's the main judge who will likely preside over the trial if there ever is one.

However, as is common, the District Judge has referred the case to a Magistrate Judge to deal with nondispositive pretrial matters: Magistrate Judge Jared C. Bennett. The Magistrate Judge gets to deal with things like all the discovery disputes. He has the authority to approve or deny most motions, and issue orders such as for sanctions. The Magistrate has mostly been "the judge" we've been talking about in the thread.

However, the District Judge (Barlow) can step in, and has, most notably in the Feb 2025 decision to require Greer to only pay $1,000.00 in sanctions on a violation that cost Hardin over $5,000.00.

Q: Yeah, so why did the judge do that?

A: The Magistrate Judge had ordered Greer to pay fee sanctions for a specific bit of discovery fuckery (ECF 218). The order specified a time period for Greer and Hardin to haggle over the numbers, a deadline for Hardin to file his fees and costs if they couldn't agree, and another deadline for Greer to reply to that filing. Then the Magistrate was supposed to decide the final amount Greer would be ordered to pay (just on this ONE specific sanction).

Unfortunately, Greer filed an objection. The objection had to be reviewed by the District Judge. Meanwhile, Hardin duly followed the schedule: he communicated with Greer and submitted his affidavit of costs incurred (over $5,000.00). However, the following day, WITHOUT having reviewed Hardin's affidavit, AND (against proper procedure) without having availed Hardin of a chance to respond, the District Judge partially granted Greer's objection to the sanctions and ordered him to pay a minimal fee of $1,000.00.

Q: Yeah BUT WHYYYYYYYYY?

A: We can't read the judges' minds, we can only go by what they tell us in their orders. We can look at the case history and read between the lines and speculate endlessly, but ultimately it's what the judges say that matters.

On this sanction, the District Judge made it clear that Greer was full of shit on pretty much all of his arguments. However, he said that since Greer had IFP status and had not previously been sanctioned, and that Greer's own idiotic fuckery had resulted in him being unable to present any witnesses in his own case, he would cut Greer some slack this time and make him pay only a minimal fee. Based on the timing and wording of the order, it's also clear that the District Judge made this decision without having reviewed Hardin's actual costs of over $5,000.00, which had been submitted only the day before.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
  • Informative
  • Winner
Reactions: Terrifik, Moosebonker, The Un-Clit and 7 others
obsdj said:
On this sanction, the District Judge made it clear that Greer was full of shit on pretty much all of his arguments. However, he said that since Greer had IFP status and had not previously been sanctioned, and that Greer's own idiotic fuckery had resulted in him being unable to present any witnesses in his own case, he would cut Greer some slack this time and make him pay only a minimal fee. Based on the timing and wording of the order, it's also clear that the District Judge made this decision without having reviewed Hardin's actual costs of over $5,000.00, which had been submitted only the day before.
Click to expand...
This was the understanding I got from the legal commentary in the thread.

I know legal shit is hard, and I know it’s annoying when people haven’t taken the time to read the thread (or even highlights) and ask the same questions over and over. That’s why an up-to-date FAQ would be really good to have, and it’s great that @TooManyKittens scratched one up for us so quickly and comprehensively. They did say they might not have all the info (or the correct info) in there, and other farmers have done a good job in corrections & additions.

Can we please get the FAQ together in a nice post, so we can link it somewhere prominently on the Greer court thread? It pains me to see Kiwis getting upset with each other over posts where we’re trying to help by asking questions/suggesting answers.

Listen to Grandma Useless or you’ll all be heading to bed with no tea. (:_(
 
  • Agree
  • Feels
  • Like
Reactions: Terrifik, Moosebonker, The Un-Clit and 1 other person
UselessRubberKeyboard said:
Can we please get the FAQ together in a nice post, so we can link it somewhere prominently on the Greer court thread? It pains me to see Kiwis getting upset with each other over posts where we’re trying to help by asking questions/suggesting answers.
Click to expand...
Legal Acumen!
Different life skills!
Alternative perspectives!
Verbally aggressive!
On a hair trigger!

By your powers combined, I am .... (insert your funny joke or media reference here)
 
  • Like
Reactions: Terrifik and Rainbow Idiot
TooManyKittens said:
Feel free to delete the entire faq and thread. Or not. Or thread ban me.

I was attempting to be helpful and it's obvious you are pissed at me for it. It won't happen again.
Click to expand...
My dude, if you are going to attempt a FAQ on pretty much ANY topic, you have to be prepared to take corrections and criticism sometimes harshly delivered. You cannot be precious about your feefees in something like this. Especially in a place like Kiwi Farms.

Thanks for the attempt though, you have a solid foundation of a FAQ for the thread.
 
  • Like
  • Agree
  • Feels
Reactions: TractorGirl, Useful_Mistake, and six goriilion others and 6 others
The Un-Clit said:
My dude, if you are going to attempt a FAQ on pretty much ANY topic, you have to be prepared to take corrections and criticism sometimes harshly delivered. You cannot be precious about your feefees in something like this. Especially in a place like Kiwi Farms.

Thanks for the attempt though, you have a solid foundation of a FAQ for the thread.
Click to expand...
I really do love that you can tell who has and has not dealt with children who get upset at their first failure/encounter with a bully.
 
  • Like
Reactions: UselessRubberKeyboard and The Un-Clit
1742523655079.png
1742523674862.png


Why, God?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back